Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state that the tool computes a value, what inputs it requires, what assumptions are made, or what the output looks like.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is very short and contains no filler, but the brevity is largely under-specification rather than efficient completeness. The single sentence conveys only the domain and lacks actionable content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no annotations, no output schema, no parameters, and an unclear invocation model, the definition is incomplete. An agent cannot determine how to call the tool, what data is needed, or how to distinguish it from x402-cohens-d.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters, so the input schema leaves nothing undocumented and there is no parameter semantics gap requiring compensation from the description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description identifies Cohen's d as the relevant statistic, which is more informative than a pure restatement of the tool name. However, there is no explicit verb like 'calculates' or 'returns,' and no differentiation from the sibling tool x402-cohens-d, which appears to serve the same purpose.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as x402-cohens-d, get_stats, or other statistical tools. The description provides no context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.